Why is the Horsehead special?

[Size9Hex]

There have been a number of good topics recently regarding well planned attempts (successful and otherwise) to observe the Horsehead. It's certainly an impressive sight in photos, but that's true of many targets. It's obvious from the posts that it's a difficult target, but there are plenty are other difficult targets. So, what makes the Horsehead so special/attractive to so many people?

[scarp15]

Quoting from George Mallory 'Because its there'. 

Because the images make it look so enigmatic and because to see visually it is elusive and challenging.

[pipnina]

I think it's because it's one of the most famous astronomical objects, but also one of the hardest of the famous to view. That and people tend to have so many misconceptions about what you need to see it that when they find out they have a chance probably get all excited. (There was a post earlier that pointed out how the HH isn't as hard as people think and it seemed to rear a few heads.)

[Size9Hex]

Quoting from George Mallory 'Because its there'. 

Because the images make it look so enigmatic and because to see visually it is elusive and challenging.

Nice one. I've done a bit of climbing and I can relate to this. It's a nice comparison. Certain routes just draw you in!

[Mike73]

Quoting from George Mallory 'Because its there'. 

Because the images make it look so enigmatic and because to see visually it is elusive and challenging.

But there are literally thousands of objects which are elusive and challenging?

[brantuk]

The HH area of the sky is fascinating and makes for some great images. Check out Olly Penrice's 40hr widefield image - it has the HH, Flame, Running Man, and M42 all in the same shot. Simply beautiful image.

[Starlight 1]

The HH area of the sky is fascinating and makes for some great images. Check out Olly Penrice's 40hr widefield image - it has the HH, Flame, Running Man, and M42 all in the same shot. Simply beautiful image.

I can rember that one from olly think it will do a 8x2 meters print and think it was 400hr

edit I look on my computer I save the pic on 20 ‎February, ‎2015 ,so if you like to look it up on here.

[John]

I think it's because of the iconic images of this object that many of us grew up with in books like "The Observers Book of Astronomy". And because it's a pretty challenging object to see visually. I believe it's pretty easy to image though.

Orion is a very rich constellation though, plenty for a good observing session even if the HH is not on the list

[Beulah]

I prefer the Flame neb myself, seeing it appear when Alnitak is just out of view.

The Horsehead is just a difficult challenge; almost an initiation into 'the Advanced Observers Club'.

Another such object to study is the resolving of Stephan's Quintet : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephan's_Quintet

43 consecutive rain days so far and some brief glimpses of Venus in the morning when the patchy fog clears; have yet to get out there and have a pop at the HH...

[PeterW]

People recognise pictures of it... My little pony! Just a tiny and dim little nag. The sky is full of "dim nebulae" that are Just as interesting. Hard... Depends on your skies and the tools you use. Go out and look at objects off the beaten path and you'll find lots of good stuff. Let's not do what imagers tend to do and only image/observe a few dozen "highlights". Phil Harrington has a "cosmic challenges" book the provides plenty of choice for different sized scopes. Simeis147, now there is a challenge!

Cheers, let's hope for a clearer 2016

PeterW

[Stub Mandrel]

Probably because it's easy to find the right bit of sky, so the challenge is 'seeing' rather than 'finding'. I haven't seen it, but when I discovered it was photographable I couldn't wait for a chance to have a go.

[acey]

There's nothing special about it, but it was one of the earliest objects to become famous from a photograph, and the image made it look eerily like a chess knight. William Herschel discovered the very faint nebula against which it's silhouetted but made no mention of the notch that is the HH. It was first noticed in photographs taken around 1900. Internet forums such as this one have helped stoke enthusiasm for it so that it has become a sort of "rite of passage", a notch or so up from Stephan's Quintet. I've looked at the Quintet several times through different instruments, because it's interesting to look at. I tried for the HH many times, and once I finally saw it I felt no great urge to revisit.

A few random things that gave me more pleasure: Barnard's Galaxy, Siamese Twins, Bear-paw Galaxy, Black-Eye Galaxy, Rosette Nebula, NGC 48 group, Abell 1656... the list goes on and on.

[Drop Of Sun]

For me what made it special to see it (16 inch dob at the SGL star party) is that it's so beautiful in photos and I never thought I would be able to see it in a scope. Sure, it was nothing like the glorious photo, but I was thrilled that I could see it. To be able to see it with my own eyes made me feel that little bit more connected to it.

Like seeing a blob and knowing it's a galaxy in my first scope. Yes, it's just a fuzzy blob, but what an amazing fuzzy blob, with billions of stars and planets!

There are many far more impressive objects at the eyepiece, but seeing it was definitely one of my observing highlights.

[cs1cjc]

The HH area of the sky is fascinating and makes for some great images. Check out Olly Penrice's 40hr widefield image - it has the HH, Flame, Running Man, and M42 all in the same shot. Simply beautiful image.

400 hours even!

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/i-LgK642h/0/O/ORION%20400%20HRS%20WEB.jpg

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I did the HH in my 8" exactly because it was so hard. I had been in amateur astronomy for over 30 years and hadn't seen that iconic object. Many object are far more impressive, of course, but the HH is just one you have to bag. It is perhaps a bit like a birding enthusiast excitement at seeing a drably coloured but very hard to spot and rare bird (but with the advantage that you know where to look for the HH, it is the easiest star-hop possible)

[Ruud]

It's a good example of pareidolia, and pareidolia will make any random object special.

[scarp15]

But there are literally thousands of objects which are elusive and challenging?

Absolutely Mike, it may be that it is compelling to seek because the photographic image captivates your imagination even though the visual impact can become underwhelming. Its particular location in Orion and among a diverse mix of other famous DSO's would also be factor.

[faulksy]

i think the hh is so special because so many people fail at seeing it, i have seen it and so has the rest of the dob mob now. nothing special to look at, but knowing you have beaten other, like a race to the finish line

[jetstream]

I stared at basically nothing for 2 years trying to see this object because of the challenge, this pretty much sums up my reason.

[John]

i think the hh is so special because so many people fail at seeing it, i have seen it and so has the rest of the dob mob now. nothing special to look at, but knowing you have beaten other, like a race to the finish line

One of the main attractions of astronomy to me is the lack of competition Mike.

It would be nice to keep it that way IMHO.

[pipnina]

One of the main attractions of astronomy to me is the lack of competition Mike.

It would be nice to keep it that way IMHO.

Between a few friends at a star party I could see things like "Race you to object x" being somewhat enjoyable.

Other than that, I don't see any way this hobby could be competitive. I could see how someone could get all elitist about it, though "I've seen object x so I'm better than you"(That would be nice to avoid) but 99%+ of us (here at least) are friendly.

[rockystar]

I think if we start getting into competition, Galileo, Messier, Herschel, Hubble, et el, have beaten us all to it.

[Size9Hex]

Thanks everyone. It's brilliant to read your thoughts on it. I think I understand it better now. Thanks for the various other things you've mentioned (books, photos, other targets); Every time I'm here I learn something new.

Some of your thoughts are quite concrete. Its existence in early photos, or in books we read as children, and I can understand why these make it special. I recall reading about it many years ago, and also the North American Nebula, which I looked for on many occasions and was thrilled when I first detected it from a darker site.

But, lots of subjective terms too: Enigmatic, elusive, iconic, an initation, a rite of passage, one you just have to bag, compelling, captivating.

A lot of these almost seem like circular definitions. It's special because it's special, which I think is completely valid and beautifully simple. Sometimes you need nothing more than this I guess.

[PeterW]

For impression, I am always taken by the size and spread of Barnards loop and the lambda orionis nebulae... On for nights of good transparency. Yer dob friends don't get an advantage on the big nebulae....

Cheers

Peter

[scarp15]

But, lots of subjective terms too: Enigmatic, elusive, iconic, an initation, a rite of passage, one you just have to bag, compelling, captivating.

Yes quite subjective, perhaps it is our sensibility that creates compelling curiosity which urges us to visually observe this and similar objects.

In terms of competition, I think that we are each competing with the elements, requiring tenacity and determination, I think at times like these the competition is unfair.